Bush Shows his Distrust in Senate Emissions Reduction Bill
Tags: Climate Change, Emissions, Global Warming, Oil, Plants, Services, Transport
President George W Bush showed his distrust in a Senate bill that would significantly cut America's greenhouse gas emissions, claiming that it is not economically feasible and would impose crippling costs both on consumers and "job creators."
According to scientists, the Climate bill would cut emissions of carbon dioxide by approximately 66 per cent within the next 40 years. However, the Bush administration is showing signs of vetoing the Senate bill.
The Lieberman-Warner climate security act will impose restrictions on power plants, factories, refineries and transportation services. These industries will have to reduce their emissions as part of a new cap-and-trade system.
Supporters claim the bill will diminish the nation's dependence on foreign oil and avoid the disastrous consequences of Global Warming, without dramatically effecting the country's economic growth which will remain in the most part unchanged.
But Bush claims that the bill would impose $6 trillion in extra costs on the US economy. "I urge the congress to be very careful about running up enormous costs for future generations," he said. There was no explanation regarding the origins or evidence of this multi-trillion dollar figure.
The White House gave some reasons in an attempt to justify its distrust in the legislation - it would lead to a rise in petrol prices and "squeeze household income." However, Green groups and defenders of the bill are calling into question the administration's economic estimates.
Steve Cochran, climate campaign director of the Environmental Defence Fund says: "All credible studies show we can grow our economy and address climate change at the same time - most saying the impact will be 1 per cent or less over twenty years - That's a far lower cost to our economy than the impact of unchecked climate change."
Environmental groups are not all entirely supportive of the bill. Greenpeace believe that it is a major step forward for the US, who may be finally taking the climate change threat seriously. However, they criticised the legislation for the huge subsidies it gives to polluting industries such as fossil fuel-burning power plants and factories.
Mike Crocker, a spokesman for the group said: "Scientists have shown we only have a small window of opportunity to take meaningful action to end Global Warming - As currently written, the Climate Security Act falls short of this critical challenge. We call on the Senate to strengthen the bill so that it is capable of dealing with the magnitude of the crisis at hand."
